To be a 'faithless elector,' you have to be a liar

Via The Victory Girls, I found this story:

No record of ‘faithless elector’ Chris Suprun as a 9/11 first responder

DALLAS – The Republican elector who has gotten national attention for refusing to vote for Donald Trump at the Electoral College on Dec. 19 was apparently not a first responder on September 11, 2001 as he has stated for years and has a questionable career history, according to an investigation by WFAA.

Chris Suprun, 42, portrays himself as a heroic firefighter who was among the first on the scene after the third plane flew into the Pentagon on 9/11.

In a heavily-publicized editorial this month for the New York Times, Suprun stated that as a member of the Electoral College he will not cast his ballot for Trump because the president-elect “shows daily he is not qualified for the office.”

Suprun, a Dallas resident for more than a decade, even used his résumé to establish credibility in the Times piece, writing in the second paragraph: “Fifteen years ago, as a firefighter, I was part of the response to the Sept. 11 attacks against our nation.”


Except, it appears that he wasn’t. From further down in the WFAA-TV article:

“He claimed to be a first responder with the Manassas Park [Virginia] Fire Department on September 11, 2001 and personally told us stories ‘I was fighting fire that day at the Pentagon.’ No, I was on a medic unit that day at the Pentagon and you make a phone call to Manassas Park and you find out that he wasn’t even employed there until October 2001,” said a first responder who knows Suprun and only agreed to speak about him if his identity was concealed.

The City of Manassas Park confirmed to WFAA that it hired Suprun on October 10, 2001, one month after the 9/11 attacks.

The fire chief there added that his department never even responded to the Pentagon or any of the 9/11 sites.

The article continues to document more of Mr Suprun’s falsehoods, and it appears that he had lied on his résumé for a good part of his professional life.

So, someone who has apparently lied about his past and his professional life also lied to the Republican Party of Texas, and the voters of Texas who cast their ballots for Donald Trump — technically, voters in the presidential race are casting their ballots for a slate of electors pledged to the presidential candidate — and this is the guy on whom the Democrats are placing their small Electoral College hopes?

My first question is: will The New York Times, which purports to be our national newspaper of record, issue an apology for publishing Mr Suprun’s article in the first place? A site search of for Suprun conducted at 11:21 AM this morning, did not return any stories about Mr Suprun having falsified his résumé, and a wider Google search for Suprun, conducted at 11:32 AM, did not return any national news media sources other than WFAA mentioning the story; it did return one hit for the story on National Review. Since the story just emerged overnight, common courtesy should give the Times the benefit of the doubt, and time to look into the story themselves, but if the editors are going to issue an apology, it ought to come by tomorrow.


As for Mr Suprun, a life of what appear to be lies is going to come back and bite him in the gluteus maximus. He told a lie about his history in a very public place, issuing a very contentious article, just the kind of thing that gets people opposed to your position to start looking into your background. I suppose that he thought that he’d get away with it, given that he seemed to get away with lying for a good part of his past, but not anymore!

This is the problem with the so-called ‘faithless electors.’ To be one, you have to be a liar, you have to have lied to the party of your candidate and the voters of your state about what you will do. The Electoral College candidates knew by June — and earlier than that, really — who the nominees of the parties they represented would be. To continue as electoral college candidates when you cannot support the presidential and vice presidential candidates to whom you are pledging yourself is a lie, a falsehood, and a deliberate fraud being perpetrated against the voters.
Cross-posted on The First Street Journal.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos